Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Camshaft Showcase: 4G63 EVO Build

  1. #1

    Camshaft Showcase: 4G63 EVO Build

    Hey guys!

    I just came across this informative article, so I just wanted to share. They tested a variety of cams such as the OEM, COMP, HKS, Kelford, Cosworth, GSC, Tomei, Buschur, and Jun! I hope this helps you guys out

    http://dsportmag.com/the-tech/engine-build/

    showcase-4g63-evo-cams-engine-build-000.jpgMitsubishi’s 4G63 engine is arguably one of the best four-cylinder engines ever built. While the early variants set records powering DSMs, later versions of the engine propelled the EVO VIII and EVO IX. In terms of strength, power potential and ease of service, the 4G63 engine simply has no equal. When DSPORT set out to conduct an extensive camshaft showcase, the 4G63 EVO VIII engine was the obvious choice. Thanks to the Volumetric Efficicency (VE)-based technology in the latest-generation of aftermarket ECUs, DSPORT is able to conduct the most comprehensive, accurate and repeatable “cam-paro” ever.

    showcase-4g63-evo-cams-final-results-001.jpgWhen we arrange all of the tested camshafts by the actual measured intake duration at 1mm, an interesting trend is revealed. The trend is that every manufacturer has a different method of computing its”advertised” duration of the camshaft. As a result, not all camshafts advertised as “264” camshafts have the same amount of actual duration. In fact, one company’s “264” camshaft may have more duration than another company’s “272” camshaft. This is the case with the Kelford 264 that actually features more duration than either the HKS 272 or Comp Cams 272+. The opposite is found with the Comp Cams 280+. This cam has less actual intake duration at 1mm than the all of the competitor’s “272” camshafts. This isn’t to say that there is anything wrong with the Comp Cam 280+ camshaft. It’s simply a bit milder cam than its name suggests. In fact, it outperformed all other camshafts at 4,500 RPM. The Comp Cam 280+ simply has a bigger difference between its advertised and actual duration when compared to the other cams. This is one challenge that’s encountered when camshafts from different manufacturers are compared. To avoid this situation, one should only compare camshafts using duration figures set at a specific lift (1mm or 0.050″). In this way, you are comparing apples to apples. Hence this is why the following results have been arranged in such an order. The cams near the top of the list feature the least amount of duration, making them “milder” in nature. The cams art the botomof the list feature the most duration, making them the “widlest.”
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    MOD2016 Male Model benyuan5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    DB
    Posts
    471
    Cars
    2006 WW EVO IX MR (sold), 2006 TB EVO IX SE
    yessssss...BUMP!
    Instagram @benyuan5

    tuned by KT Motoring 5/9/2015, 1/20/2016

  3. #3
    Thank you, this was very informative.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by lasarmas View Post
    Thank you, this was very informative.
    Anytime, I'm happy to help

  5. #5
    Newbie henryncoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Baldwin Park
    Posts
    17
    Cars
    Evo IX & AP2 (Sold)
    great read!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •